On Englishing The Bible
Since the publication of the Revised Version in 1881, there has followed a steady trickle of other renderings of the sacred writings. The discovery of manuscripts, and the increased knowledge of ancient languages, has aided the difficult task of translation.
When the late Ronald Knox wrote On Englishing the Bible (Eng. 3s. 6d.), putting on record some of his experiences as a translator and discussing many problems which had confronted him, he described his labours as “nine years hard”. He retired from the Roman Catholic chaplaincy of Oxford University to undertake the work, now on sale and known as the “Knox Version”.
Within the Roman Catholic Church there was considerable opposition. First, because it was a translation of the Latin Vulgate, and not a revision of the Douay Version, which, with the attachment of Bishop Challoner’s notes, has been the Bible of the Roman Catholic Church in the English-speaking countries ; plus the criticisms and many alternatives from those to whom Knox submitted his translations before publication. Altogether it was a chastening experience.
The reason for new versions of the Bible —and there are two more in the course of preparation, one each from the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church—is to meet the needs of those who desire the Bible in modern English. It is almost 350 years since the publication of the Authorised Version, and in so many instances words have changed their meaning, whilst others have become obsolete. The translators of the Revised Standard Version, which is now in such popular demand, went as far as to publish explanations of their decisions, and to give an astonishing list of words, the meanings of which have changed.
Much of this book is given over to the consideration of Latin references and their presentation : “For every common word in every living language has, not one meaning, but a quantity of shades of meaning. If you set out to give salus the meaning of ‘salvation’ all through the New Testament, you find yourself up against Paul, in visiting the ship’s company during the storm to take a little food for the sake of their salvation” (p.10).
The difficulty, as Knox saw it, was that, while a word-for-word translation technically might be correct, the question which persisted in his mind was, “Is this the English an Englishman would understand ?” “To be intelligible when you are translating a document, it is not enough to produce a series of sentences, each of which, taken by itself, has a meaning. You have got to show the argument running through your piece, or you have not fulfilled your contract ; you have not translated.” The problem is not entirely solved by merely translating into modern English. There are two points which demand satisfaction. In the Authorised Version the majestic cadences of the language have settled themselves in the popular appreciation ; and its words and phrases have found a home in the everyday tongue and in the affections of the English people. Any translation losing sight of this must fail—hence the problem of the need to present the Bible in modern English, yet to retain the unseen influence of the Authorised Version.
The second point concerns the future of the version—how long will it be of practical value ? Will it quickly recede into the background ? Knox said his object was to present the Bible in “timeless English”—if there is such a thing. In this he defined his hope that his version would be both readable and understandable 200 years hence.
Whether Knox ever contemplated non-Catholic readers of his translation I doubt—actually there are many. He asks the question, ‘Where are the Catholic readers of the Bible ? When did you last come across one of your friends with a Bible open in front of him ? In the old days non-Catholics used to read the Bible as a devotional exercise, much as we said the rosary. That is all over . . . we are in an odd situation. Nobody reads the Bible ; popes and bishops are always telling us we ought to read the Bible, and when we produce a translation of the Bible the only thing people complain about is your rendering of the diminutive snippets that are read in church on Sunday. “Of course’, they say, “the book is all right for private reading’—in a tone which implies that such a practice is both rare and unimportant.”
In the result the Knox Version has much to commend it. It is untainted with Roman Catholic doctrine, and the language provokes thought, making it a worthy companion of the other familiar versions of the Bible. A regret to a non-Catholic is the retention of the Latin form of names. “Abdias” for Obadiah and “Sophonias” for Zephaniah are neither helpful nor welcome to the English ear ; and at first it is confusing to find four Books of Kings and two Books of Paralipomena instead of two books each of Samuel, Kings and Chronicles. The Apocrypha is included in the translation.
Knox was a brilliant scholar, and when he died in 1957 he left behind a memorial of his labours worthy to be read and used by Bible students.
Is Pentecost Happening Today? – (Part 3)